Re: Inconsistency in vacuum behavior - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nikita Malakhov
Subject Re: Inconsistency in vacuum behavior
Date
Msg-id CAN-LCVNzvhhvfkQX3oOk9zAms3_LUxS+R_Fd+HT_8mx4rZ8O3A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Inconsistency in vacuum behavior  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi!

I've found the discussion you'd mentioned before, checking now.

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 4:49 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 08:12:18PM +0300, Nikita Malakhov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently there is no error in this case, so additional thrown error would
> require a new test.
> Besides, throwing an error here does not make sense - it is just a check
> for a vacuum
> permission, I think the right way is to just skip a relation that is not
> suitable for vacuum.
> Any thoughts or objections?

Could you check if this is consistent between the behavior of VACUUM
FULL and CLUSTER ?  See also Nathan's patches.

--
Justin


--
Regards,
Nikita Malakhov
Postgres Professional 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)
Next
From: Alexander Pyhalov
Date:
Subject: Re: Inconsistency in vacuum behavior